Mika‘s certainly garnered more than his fair share of gay press in recent months. Most of the ink revolves around the pop-star’s secretive sexuality. As we all know, the crooner won’t confirm rumors he’s a queer.

At first glance, it would appear Out‘s July issue follows the same old story. Take a peek inside, however, and it soon becomes clear that their Mika-related coverage ain’t just a guessing game. The issue serves as a rumination on the state of the gay nation. And with potentially liberating results.

No doubt homos have come a long way over the past four decades or so. While we’ve certainly got a way to go, Out wonders what’s become of the screaming queen. As EIC Aaron Hicklin write in his editor’s letter:

It may be disingenuous of Mika to claim that who he sleeps with is immaterial, but for an increasing number young gay men, identifying as gay is becoming anachronistic, if not completely irrelevant.

Have militant gays gone the way of the dodo? Find out, after the jump…
Mika may hog the spotlight, but there’s another queer “queer” British entertainer who deserves a second look: Patrick Wolf. The young entertainer’s genre-defying sound and yen for eyeliner have raised more than a few eyebrows. Like coverboy Mika, Wolf refuses to classify himself as gay. While he’s identified publicly as “bisexual,” it’s clear this “queer” would rather not identify at all. He tells assistant editor Jason Lamphier: “I don’t like to belong to any genre… Sexually and romantically, I want to be free always.”

Gay songster Ari Gold disagrees. He tells Out‘s Matthew Breen, “I personally find artists who aren’t afraid to say they are gay and are willing to risk a little popularity in the hopes of social change far more interesting.” Not surprisingly, Mika disagrees: “As far as I’m concerned, the most important thing is what is in my songs and the music itself, much more so tan what I talk about in front of the press.” Mika’s reticence comes less from a penchant for privacy and more, it seems, from an urge to establish a viable (and bankable) career:

I admit that I’m young and the biggest part of my job now is finding my feet with this new performance-celebrity aspect to what I do, and that goes right down to talking about sex and talking about labels and people wanting to label you… Will it change me? Possibly. I’ll probably change the way I respond to things; I’ll probably change the way I talk or don’t talk about certain things.

A precarious response, yes, but perhaps the most timely…

Not only does Mika teeter on the edge of full-fledged stardom, but he’s coming of age at time when coming out doesn’t mean the same thing. As Hicklin notes in the aforementioned editor’s letter, the once edgy gay ghettos have become bastions for the bourgeoisie:

[In these places] gay has become blandly inoffensive, white and middle class. What young, dynamic person would want to identify with that? It would be a horrible irony if the communities and beach resorts that once subverted society’s mores and pieties ended up feeling as privileged and alienating as the culture they were reacting against.

Consider the prophecy fulfilled, Hicklin.

Speaking as young queers, there’s no doubt in our collective, virtual mind these queer enclaves cater to a specific social class – a sad reality made clear in the magazine’s Province Town pictorial. John Waters, Nan Goldin, Jack Pierson and a slew of other queer creatives contributed their personal snap shots from the historically homo resort. On one page the reader will see a 2005 picture of Waters – a man who has no doubt raked in the dough – sitting at his desk with a stack of books, looking quite tame. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Directly next to Waters, however, one sees a Goldin print of David Armstrong. Armstrong may be lounging by a placid pool, but the artist looks anything but tame. He’s got an undeniably revolutionary attitude, a confrontational essence rarely seen in Province Town these days.

So, what does this all mean? Possibly nothing. Or, everything. Out may have mined the gay pride of the future: a rejection of the movement’s gentrified existence – marriage, tax cuts, adoption – and move in a decidedly (and refreshingly) queer direction.

Gone are the high kicking drag queens and mustached clones hellbent on dismantling mainstream masculinity. 21 century gay pride may be less about the glitz and the glitter and more about staying true to oneself, eschewing constricting labels and charting your own course.

“Gay” may not be the war cry it once was; in fact, there may be no war cry. The sexual evolution may not be televised. It may be sung, written, drawn, painted and acted by men and women who manipulate social labels without saying a word…

Sorry to feel so chapped, but damn. Maybe you don’t belong on a blog for gays if you find us, and the label, so passe and tiresome. Be post-gay somewhere else if you must. Meanwhile, gays are still fighting for something approaching equality and decent human respect in this country.

Jun 8, 2007 at 6:29 pm · @Reply ·

Eminent Victorian

Mika seems to be saying, “I want all the adulation gays can muster without really doing any of the work [like making a non-flash-in-the=[pan album].” Another funny thing: we stopped our subscription to OUT over a year ago, with a letter to them explaining we were dropping it because they’d become, in fact, irrelevant . . . and they still send it to us anyway, no doubt as part of their inflated subscription statistics.

Jun 8, 2007 at 7:41 pm · @Reply ·

Gregg

These folks who are “against labels” are just the latest version of the closet. This is nothing new. For decades we’ve had people saying “I just fall in love with a PERSON not a gender.” Meanwhile they’re craving dick and flaming all over the place.

These folks want their cake and they want to eat it too. They try to enjoy the freedoms gay people have fought so hard for, while trying to avoid the ‘stigma’ of being labeled “gay”.

They need to grow up and grow a spine.

Jun 8, 2007 at 8:55 pm · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

“Wolf refuses to classify himself as gay. While heâ€™s identified publicly as ‘bisexual,’…’I donâ€™t like to belong to any genreâ€¦ Sexually and romantically, I want to be free always.'”

Just another het emo boy using the trendiness of bisexuality to make a name for himself. When his star rises, he’ll shed his “bisexuality” faster than Bowie shedding his orange fright wig and shinny jumpsuit.

I still think people coming out as gay is the brave thing to do, since so many around us want us to believe that we’re all really bi and should not limit ourselves. It seems today that if you haven’t slept with a woman you’re labeled narrow minded.

Mika’s just a closet case and I have a hard time holding that against him considering.

What is the big deal? So what if he doesn’t want to identify as gay. Seems to me there are bigger fish to fry than some non-talented singer yammering about his sexuality. Yawn, yawn, yawnÂ¡

Jun 9, 2007 at 6:26 am · @Reply ·

John C

Patrick Wolf has talked in Attitude magazine about taking his school to the European Court of Human Rights for homophobic bullying (he won), his song The Childcatcher is about his own rape experience with an older man and he’s stated unequivocally that his last lengthy relationship was with another guy. That looks pretty open to me.

I wholeheartedly agree with the majority of the post-gay ideology. The only reason we like “Gay”(tm) is because it’s safe and makes picking a sex-partner easier but when it comes to things like marriage, job opportunities even the most “festive” queen sees that “Gay” is just a word. Gregg said “These folks who are â€œagainst labelsâ€ are just the latest version of the closet.” “Coming out of the closet” all too often is just an invitation to another closet. A closet where you’ll be expected to adopt a unifying mindset, wardrobe, and aesthetic. A lavender brownshirt, if you will. I’m out to everyone I know but I don’t play the game when someone I meet asks me “so you’re gay” when I say I’d like to fuck Jake Gyllenhaal all night long. I won’t volunteer to hang the purple albatross around my neck. Not when it truly is irrelevant. The more we keep letting Whitey [the Man, whatever you want to call the powers that be] push all of us minorities into our own little corner, the longer it will take us to realize who the real enemy is. And that none of the bullshit which “separates” us really matters.

I’m very suspicious of this “post-gay” movement. Everything I’ve read here dangerously lables gay as “irrevelant”, which is an attack on the lgbt community.

I’m part of the Young Gard, I’m politically active and I’m 20. I see this post-gay nonsense is another product of a politically and culturally ignorant generation. It reeks of the shallow individualism that has gentrified our community. If you want to take our core identity, culture, and beliefs out of the Big Gay Apple, all you are going to be left with is a rotting fruit.

We are so close to something big. The political tide is turning, and during the next presidency we could see a shift in support for gay rights. It would be a shame to throw all of that away, just because we have problems within our community that certain people are too damn lazy to try and change.

You see a problem with classism, gentrification, and racism in the gay community? Get the fuck out of Chelsea and the Castro mindset and do something about it. Tackle the problem from the inside. If you put yourself on the outside of the community, the community will not let you change it from the inside. All you have accomplished is to give 40 years of progress to a white, upper-middle-class, male elite. Don’t go on talking about rainbow colored birds around your neck and how you’ve got an open bed, get active.

I can understand how this “post-gay” stuff has come to happen, the Old Guard has let our community deteriorate into a persuit of “fabulousness” which unfortunately has a lot of racist and especially classist consequences. They’ve left us with inneffectual leadership, and they haven’t challeneged the Young Guard at all. You have to actually look after the next generation, teach them what you know, inspire them, and protect them in order to continue a changing, progressive, and radicalized gay community. Not say “its all up to you.”

Jun 9, 2007 at 4:39 pm · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

“the longer it will take us to realize who the real enemy is”

It’s apparent from your reply who you believe the “real” enemy is. The Man doesn’t need to push anyone into a corner, as long as people like you are doing the job for him.

That you can tell people you want to fuck Jake Whathisname all night long is made possible by the people who came before you, (and I,) and giving them props is the right thing to do.

That you want to play some unnameable sexuality mind fuck with those around you is your right. But do not expect others to be the least bit interested when you denounce their efforts as fascism.

In ten years when you’re married to a woman and as Gregg wrote, you blather about how, “I just fall in love with a PERSON not a gender.” Don’t be surprised by those who call bullshit on you.

You can get together with Tom Robinson and have a Glad Not To Be Gay hoedown, or rather; a pity party for two.

Jun 9, 2007 at 4:43 pm · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

MattB, unfortunately most younger people want to be a part of the majority. With heterosexuals being the majority and a daily dose of anti-LGBTQ bigotry, too many people are seeing gay as bad, homogeneous as good. As Gregg wrote, it is another sort of closet, where you live as a homosexual, but denounce your own sexuality.

They seem to believe that they’re saying, “I’m just like YOU,” when really what they’re saying is, “I’m nothing like THEM.”

I’m genuinely happy to see that you’re so politically active at a young age. Keep swinging the hammer, MattB.

Jun 9, 2007 at 4:51 pm · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

I’m sorry John C, but I did a google search about Mr. Wolf (Apps) before posting and from what I’ve read he appears to just be using bisexuality as a “quirk” to sell himself to emo boys and girls.

The stories are legion of people who used bisexuality as fashion and even forced themselves into same-sex relationships, only later to denounce the very thing they claimed they were so intently.

Jun 9, 2007 at 4:58 pm · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

Apparently Mr. Wolf posted this entry on his blog after the Attitude interview came out:

“Then from a recent article in a rag called “attitude”, taking the story I gave them, which was one of trying to inspire strength, love to ALL human creatures no matter who they want to make love or sex with. Overplayed sorrow, alleged “sexual abuse” and wiping away tears (a total fictionalisation (sic) on behalf of the magazine, thanks for that) regurgitated victimisation (sic) and tortured artist syndrome, nobody ever takes a quote of mine out of context and gets away with it.. oh, hang on, yes they have, many times in the last 5 years, it won’t be happening much more, thanks Quest Management! To tell the truth I think the saddest thing gay culture ever did to itself a canon of icons, martyrs of trouble and suffering. I am proud and aware of the complexities of my character and desire, that I have been through wars, like all of us have and come out smiling and dancing on the other side, my bruises are as inspiring to me as my first love, the second concerto I played on the Theremin in the dark. I do and say what I please no matter the weather and have always wanted to promote that in you too.”

@ MattB: If post-gay reeks of shallow individualism then you surely must also smell the vapid collectivism of identity politics. We are _not_ close to something big and the more we succumb to the marketization of Gay(tm) the farther away we get. You talk a big talk about “[getting] the fuck out of Chelsea and the Castro mindset” but if not for that mindset, what _is_ this unified Gay identity you speak of?

@ Paul Raposo: I think you misunderstood my lack of name-tagging for a lack of clearly identifying my own sexual orientation. That or your statement about my marrying a woman in ten years [when I’m 47??] because I “fall in love with a PERSON not a gender” is a clear straw man. I like men. I’m queer, even gay. But my identity doesn’t lie with my sexual orientation any more than it does with the kinds of music or movies I like. I’m a human being first and foremost and my duties are to that group. Push your closet on someone else, brother.

I find it funny, then, that I agree with your comment [no. 14] to MattB about the cow-like need to belong to a larger group and that homogeneity is bad. I think the sexually radical communities [_plural_] of the Sixties were much more effective than anything today’s assimilationist GLBT movement can cook up.

Jun 9, 2007 at 8:35 pm · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

“Iâ€™m a human being first and foremost and my duties are to that group.”

You ever heard the saying, “I don’t want to change the world, just my small corner of it.”? You’re too busy trying to change the world, that you ignore your own community. Yet you have the time to refer to the LGBTQ community as collectivist and fascist. If you want to see a different community, then join it, don’t ridicule it.

“Push your closet on someone else, brother.”

I’d rather push your closet door open, brother. The people who came before us accorded you the opportunity to identify as queer and/or gay, so don’t shit on what they’ve done for you.

“I think the sexually radical communities [_plural_] of the Sixties were much more effective than anything todayâ€™s assimilationist GLBT movement can cook up.”

Bullshit. The free-love folk of the sixties were the most anti-gay people you could find. Today they are the boomer’s who are voting against equal-marriage and sex-ed in schools, basing their beliefs on their own misguided screw-anything-that-moves ideals from their past.

That you would call today’s LGBTQ community assimilationist, while yourself trying to assimilate into some “broader” humanistic society while ignoring and chastising your own community, is absurd. If you have trouble finding your place in a small group, you’ll never find it in a large group.

Jun 10, 2007 at 9:30 am · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

BTW–RSL, thanks for presenting an interesting argument. I think Queerty needs to do more posts like this, to pick up the comment sections and give the readers something to do while waiting for the next installment of “Morning Goods.”

@ Paul Raposo, I wasn’t referring to the straight-only free-love folk. I was talking about the people involved at the Stonewall, Harry Hay, people like that.

However, you still haven’t explained how my sexual orientation somehow unites me with a [highly disparate] group of people whose taste in clothes, music, cinema, indeed _culture_ I don’t agree with. What should unite us is a need to undo and liberate the antiquated notions of marriage [not just make ourselves a place at the fly-covered table] but we’re all too often too tired from our White Parties [_White_ Parties, heh!] to affect any kind of meaningful change in the society at large.

If I sound cynical it’s because I am. ;) But seriously… I don’t buy the idea that because we both like to fuck boys [and by boys, I mean men] we’re somehow ideologically similar or even compatible. If you can show me how or why this is true, perhaps I’d buy a ticket for this rainbow parade but until then…

Jun 10, 2007 at 2:16 pm · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

“I was talking about the people involved at the Stonewall, Harry Hay, people like that.”

Well, you should have specified this. But then I guess that would have meant mentioning the “gay rights” movement of the sixties and I suppose that would go against your grain, what with the word gay and all.

I’m glad you appreciate the work that the LGBTQ’s of the sixties did. As do I. But I also realize that they set the ground work for us today and to stop and become stagnant is a slap to the face of all the people who fought back at the Stonewall; who marched silently for equal rights for homosexuals; and who marched in the first pride parades.

Fighting for sexual liberation is wonderful. But you have to fight for something else for the other 23 hours in the day, otherwise we’re reduced to nothing except our genitals. And isn’t that what we’re fighting against?

“However, you still havenâ€™t explained how my sexual orientation somehow unites me with a [highly disparate] group of people whose taste in clothes, music, cinema, indeed _culture_ I donâ€™t agree with.”

The fact that you share an “alternative lifestyle” is what unifies you with the disparate group you chastise. Harry Hay marched and argued and fought so that everyone could feel free to come out. By rejecting the way other LGBTQ’s choose to live their lives and inferring that your choices are correct, you’re simply replacing one dogma with another.

I think Patrick Wolf is a douche bag phony. But he has a right to live his life without me interfering, or making demands, or trying to imprint myself on him–or you.

If he’s willing to stand up and fight for LGBTQ rights, then I’ll welcome him with open arms to the fold. I just won’t invite him out for drinks afterwards.

“What should unite us is a need to undo and liberate the antiquated notions of marriage [not just make ourselves a place at the fly-covered table]”

Again, people before us fought for the rights of the people who wish to make a home life for themselves; or to choose not to. That you feel marriage is, I think, a cop out, is a ridiculous excuse for either removing yourself from the community, or for not bothering to help fight the good fight. You as a queer man may not want to get married, but that other gay men want to is reason enough for you to jump in and help. Just because you don’t want it, doesn’t mean you should walk away when your brothers and sisters need you.

“but weâ€™re all too often too tired from our White Parties [_White_ Parties, heh!] to affect any kind of meaningful change in the society at large.”

So which one is it, RSL? You think its banal to pursue marriage; you think it’s scandalous to party; you think it’s collectivist to seek out a group to belong to. Which is the correct path? Sitting at a keyboard talking about liberation, rather than living life?

“If I sound cynical itâ€™s because I am. ;) But seriouslyâ€¦ I donâ€™t buy the idea that because we both like to fuck boys [and by boys, I mean men] weâ€™re somehow ideologically similar or even compatible.”

We’re not. However, that we both like to fuck men makes us comparable. Every minority has different people with different personalities within it. But that they are a minority is inherently unifying. By taking something as similar as sexual orientation and making it a wedge between us, we lose and they win.

“If you can show me how or why this is true, perhaps Iâ€™d buy a ticket for this rainbow parade but until thenâ€¦”

You don’t need a ticket, or my justification to join the parade, RSL. You just need to walk out your front door.

@ Paul Raposo, You have a couple of good points in there. That is to say that I already agree with some of them. [Don’t go dreaming you’ve made me see some metaphorical light.] But I still don’t buy what, to me, is your major selling point that my identity correlates with my “alternative lifestyle”. By assuming that my lifestyle [what a nasty, clumsy word] somehow has anything to do with my sexual orientation… You yourself say it right:

“Fighting for sexual liberation is wonderful. But you have to fight for something else for the other 23 hours in the day, otherwise weâ€™re reduced to nothing except our genitals. And isnâ€™t that what weâ€™re fighting against?”

Sadly, no. I think the Gay(tm) machine is complicit in reducing us to just that. Sex sells. The machine is out to make more of what we’re buying. And, again sadly, the same moneyed interests [read: Whitey, etc] are pulling the strings here too.

We could keep this up all day but there’s other posts to pollute. ;)

Jun 11, 2007 at 8:31 am · @Reply ·

Mr. B

Wow. This got hot and heavy pretty fast.

It’s interesting that so many people who are angrily deriding “homogenity” are demanding the same thing. Predictably, bisexuality is repeatedly referred to as either trendy or a cop-out. Uh?

Don’t get me wrong. I’m annoyed by straight folks who try to be all cutting-edge by taking on a queer persona, as I don’t particularly think it’s fair to “brand” an identity that has been a struggle for so many people. (And for the record, I truly believe Mika has a fairly low-number rating on the Kinsey scale and he won’t make a statement because he doesn’t want to be proven “straight”.)Yes, it’s really frustrating to see a fellow queer get showered with appliances and approval (thanks to Alison Bechdel for that line) while the rest of us are still having our partners of umpteen years referred to as “your friend” as we’re asked when we’ll settle down. But I think it’s knee-jerky for gay men and lesbians to let the “trendy” bisexuals speak for everybody who doesn’t stick to one gender. Isn’t telling a bi man that he’s really a closeted gay kind of the same thing as our parents telling us we’d “grow out of this phase” way back when? Since when are we the authority on what turns everybody’s crank?

So many people are commenting on how “everybody” loves “people, not genders” these days, and really I see the exact opposite, especially among gay men. Bi people are laughed out of the club (or excoriated as sell-outs), and gay guys do everything in their power to constantly remind the world that they’re 100% incapable of sexually responding to anybody who doesn’t have their exact same anatomy. Okay, fine, but since when do you speak for the millions of other queers out there? And why must you protest so loudly? I think we’re long past the days of the majority of the world assuming that we can “change” if we want to. There is not some kind of bisexual new world order creating a post-gay world. Pomosexuals have come and gone, and the gay-straight binary is still going strong. And for a class of people who are struggling so hard to be seen as people, not sexualities, that is damned hypocritical.

Jun 11, 2007 at 10:25 am · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

“You have a couple of good points in there. That is to say that I already agree with some of them. [Donâ€™t go dreaming youâ€™ve made me see some metaphorical light.]”

Perish the thought.

“But I still donâ€™t buy what, to me, is your major selling point that my identity correlates with my ‘alternative lifestyle’.”

Your identity does not correlate with your queerness–in that you’re not queer because of who you are and you’re not who you are, because you’re queer. What is does correlate with is a group identity. How you choose to identify within our group is your choice. But that you have a group you can identify with is the unifying factor.

“By assuming that my lifestyle [what a nasty, clumsy word] somehow has anything to do with my sexual orientationâ€¦”

How you live your life has noting to do with your being queer, (to respect you I use this word, but I find this word nasty and clumsy.) However, I never assumed nothing about you; I made a presumption.

“You yourself say it right: ‘Fighting for sexual liberation is wonderful. But you have to fight for something else for the other 23 hours in the day, otherwise weâ€™re reduced to nothing except our genitals. And isnâ€™t that what weâ€™re fighting against?'”

I also think that was brilliant.

“Sadly, no. I think the Gay(tm) machine is complicit in reducing us to just that.”

The only people I’ve seen make this argument are those who wish to cast the LGBTQ community in a negative light. You have separated your brain from your penis. You’ve made it clear that you are one person outside the bedroom and another inside. You’ve reduced yourself to glands, urges and orgasms.

“Sex sells. The machine is out to make more of what weâ€™re buying. And, again sadly, the same moneyed interests [read: Whitey, etc] are pulling the strings here too.”

But you don’t have to buy.

Jun 11, 2007 at 11:49 am · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

“Itâ€™s interesting that so many people who are angrily deriding ‘homogenity’ are demanding the same thing.”

Where? All I’ve argued is that using the LGBTQ community–or the fact that we have a community–as an excuse to exclude oneself from said community is foolish. One cannot remove oneself from a community, yet still expect to dictate how is should move, or advance.

“Predictably, bisexuality is repeatedly referred to as either trendy or a cop-out. Uh?”

Phony bisexuals, Mr. B. The type of person, like Pat Wolf, who appears to use bisexuality as a selling point. I’ve never met a bi person who was completely bi. They’ve all had a major preference for one sex, or the other.

“Donâ€™t get me wrong. Iâ€™m annoyed by straight folks who try to be all cutting-edge by taking on a queer persona, as I donâ€™t particularly think itâ€™s fair to ‘brand’ an identity that has been a struggle for so many people.”

Well written, Mr. B.

“(And for the record, I truly believe Mika has a fairly low-number rating on the Kinsey scale and he wonâ€™t make a statement because he doesnâ€™t want to be proven ‘straight’.)”

Could you elaborate on this?

“Yes, itâ€™s really frustrating to see a fellow queer get showered with appliances and approval (thanks to Alison Bechdel for that line) while the rest of us are still having our partners of umpteen years referred to as ‘your friend’ as weâ€™re asked when weâ€™ll settle down. But I think itâ€™s knee-jerky for gay men and lesbians to let the ‘trendy’ bisexuals speak for everybody who doesnâ€™t stick to one gender.”

That’s why all of us, in particular people like RSL, need to be vocal in the community and media, so that one voice isn’t representative of us all.

I think the reason the media and its watchers like people like Mika and Pat Wolf, is because they’re “safe” queer, not bus station bathroom queer. There’s always a belief that they will come out as straight. Whereas gay men and lesbians are just that. No chance for a correction, if you will.

And yes, sometimes I believe that is how a lot of bi’s feel. That dating the same sex is a phase and they will find Mr/Mrs Opposite Sex and settle down to a “normal” life. That may seem harsh, but I’ve seen it too many times to deny it.

“Isnâ€™t telling a bi man that heâ€™s really a closeted gay kind of the same thing as our parents telling us weâ€™d ‘grow out of this phase’ way back when? Since when are we the authority on what turns everybodyâ€™s crank?”

I’ve never told anyone what they “really are.” However, when it’s blindly obvious that a person is taking our cred to build their own, they need to get slapped down. The type of person who wears bisexuality like a fashion accessory is a hindrance to our community, because when they come out as what they really were all a long–straight–people hold them up as “proof” that we can change and that homosexuality is a “choice.”

There was a Canadian documentary a few years back based on a sex survey taken by teens. One teen male claimed to be bi, but it’s apparent he was ashamed of this, because he seemed to hide it when he was alone and brag about amongst friends. He’d get pissed off when his friends would call him and loudly announce he wasn’t gay, he was bi.

He goes out and has sex while drunk with an older man and then complains that it was terrible and gay men only use people. He spent the end of the program stating that “that lifestyle” is dangerous and teens should void it. That right now he is straight and if he “happens” to “become gay” later, then he’ll see what he should do then.

The program did not have one gay, or lesbian teen and used the “bi” teen as their only representation of queerness. Some representation.

Also, I don’t understand how a person can never have any kind of interaction with people of the opposite sex, yet still say they’re bi. I know a man who performed oral sex on another man once while in college and ten years later with a wife and two children, still claims to be bi. And Oh how his trendy hipster friends love having a “bi” for a friend. If sleeping with one woman, or several doesn’t make you straight, how can one BJ make you bi?

“So many people are commenting on how ‘everybody’ loves ‘people, not genders’ these days,”

Not me. I hate all humanity 8^)

“and really I see the exact opposite, especially among gay men. Bi people are laughed out of the club (or excoriated as sell-outs), and gay guys do everything in their power to constantly remind the world that theyâ€™re 100% incapable of sexually responding to anybody who doesnâ€™t have their exact same anatomy. Okay, fine, but since when do you speak for the millions of other queers out there? And why must you protest so loudly?”

Who and where?

My main problem with bi’s are the men who use men, but love women; or the women who use women, but love men. Have you ever tried to date people like that? A female friend broke up with her gf of four years, because the gf “decided” she was straight–a hasbien–and went back to her ex-bf, got married and had kids. My friend had wanted to get married and have kids for four long years, and that cow strung her along the entire time.

“I think weâ€™re long past the days of the majority of the world assuming that we can ‘change’ if we want to. There is not some kind of bisexual new world order creating a post-gay world.”

Yes there is. I read about it in Watchtower.

“Pomosexuals have come and gone, and the gay-straight binary is still going strong. And for a class of people who are struggling so hard to be seen as people, not sexualities, that is damned hypocritical.”

Sometimes it makes life easier to get off the fence and decide.

Jun 11, 2007 at 12:20 pm · @Reply ·

Mr. B

Paul–you topped 1000 words! :)

Oh, I have no idea whether Mika is gay, straight, pansexual, or attracted only to papier-mache. But given how devoted he is to giving his music a gay spin (sometimes to the point of beating it to death), combined with his dogged refusal to answer the “Are you or aren’t you?” question (not that I think he owes anyone an answer), I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Mika turned out to be straight. Part of me can’t help but think he doesn’t want to be dishonest about his sexual orientation, but he doesn’t want to lose the gay cred he craves.

Or…maybe he’s a big old ‘mo. Whatev, he’s fun to sing along with, especially while dancing by oneself in the midst of housework.

Back to the topic at large. Paul, you seem incredulous about how I could sense any anti-bi sentiment in the gay community (and I wasn’t just addressing you, for the record). But then you end your commentary with “Sometimes it makes life easier to get off the fence and decide.” Now, sit tight–I’m not calling you anti-bi. But you have ME confused now.

I truly don’t see a lot of acceptance of bi folks in gay and lesbian circles. Have you never heard the terms “Bi now, gay later” or “Gay, straight, or lying?” If I had a dime for every gay man I ever heard using scare quotes for the term “bisexual,” or insisting that a man who called himself bi was just kidding himself/half in the closet, or even just referring to it as fence-sitting, as you did, my college loans would be history.

I’m not saying everybody in the world is bisexual, or that everyone should be gender-blind. It just annoys me when bisexuality is seen as indecision. Maybe some people don’t need to “decide”–maybe having had past relationships with both Erin and Aaron works fine for them. Like, whose life exactly are we making easier, here? The fence-sitter’s, or the angry gay who’s afraid to get ditched for a member of the opposite sex? I understand the frustration of watching “hasbians” and “yestergays” take advantage of the legal system and marry a hetero partner when they could never have done that with a same-sex one (and, of course, it’s usually a lot easier for them to reproduce too). But there it is again–if Joe or Jane Queer settles down with an opposite-sex partner, they’re a sell-out, and if Joe or Jane settles down with a same-sex partner, everyone’s waiting for the other shoe to drop and Joe/Jane to trade them in for a different model. I don’t know where all these bi-accepting queers are, but where I live they’re most certainly not the majority.

I guess I’m just tired of Ls and Gs comforting themselves by attempting to invalidate the existence of Bs, you know? They’re not going to go away just because they’re not taken seriously. The rest of us sure haven’t.

Jun 11, 2007 at 2:34 pm · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

“Paulâ€“you topped 1000 words! :)”

Sad, isn’t it 8^)

“I wouldnâ€™t be at all surprised if Mika turned out to be straight. Part of me canâ€™t help but think he doesnâ€™t want to be dishonest about his sexual orientation, but he doesnâ€™t want to lose the gay cred he craves.”

That makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.

“Paul, you seem incredulous about how I could sense any anti-bi sentiment in the gay community (and I wasnâ€™t just addressing you, for the record).”

I’m not doubtful of your feeling of an anti-bi attitude within the LGBTQ community. It does exist.

“But then you end your commentary with ‘Sometimes it makes life easier to get off the fence and decide.’ Now, sit tightâ€“Iâ€™m not calling you anti-bi. But you have ME confused now.”

What I meant was you have to decide what community you belong to, as in are you an LGBTQ person, or are you an, “I’m not gay, I just AM” person. Sorry if it seemed convoluted.

“I truly donâ€™t see a lot of acceptance of bi folks in gay and lesbian circles. Have you never heard the terms ‘Bi now, gay later’ or ‘Gay, straight, or lying?'”

Yes, but how much of that is joking and how much is phobia? Let’s face it, there have been a lot of cases of bi’s turning out gay, or lesbian. I guess the people who feel this way are just playing the odds that the bi person will come out as gay/lez.

In my own experiences, too many bi people have acted as if being the B in LGBTQ is something bad and therefore downplay their status as part of the queer community and up-play their status within the straight community. Or sometimes, like the friend who gave one BJ, over play their status as bi. If you stand in the middle of the road, you risk being hit by the horse and cart.

I wouldn’t like it if people constantly referred to me as straight and I would no doubt correct them and point out that I’m gay. However, bi’s seem to act as of there’s straight, gay, lesbian, trans, queer and then there’s –wait for it!–BI! Like they’re some ethereal thing that us mere mortals can’t comprehend. I had one bi girl say, “You can’t comprehend it, you’re ‘just’ gay.” WTF?

“If I had a dime for every gay man I ever heard using scare quotes for the term ‘bisexual,’ or insisting that a man who called himself bi was just kidding himself/half in the closet, or even just referring to it as fence-sitting, as you did, my college loans would be history.”

Well, to me it’s like losing a family member. There are so few of us in the world, losing one to the “other side” is painful. That’s ludicrous, I know, but it just seems that too many bi’s view their same-sex attraction as playing and act all superior and grown up because they also date the opposite sex, as if it’s something they can escape to if we don’t give them what they want.

A friend is dating a bi young man, (both are in their early twenties) and the bi-BF is constantly talking about his ex-gf and was always introducing her as his gf. Yet he has never introduced my friend as his bf, not even to other gay people. it just seems that so many bi’s treat their ss partners like shiny new toys to show off.

“Iâ€™m not saying everybody in the world is bisexual, or that everyone should be gender-blind. It just annoys me when bisexuality is seen as indecision.”

I don’t see it as such, personally. But it’s like what Andrew Dice Clay said once, “What? Some days you feel like a nut and some days you don’t?” How do they, I guess, decide who to date? And I think that’s where the stigma comes from; bi’s seem to make conscious decisions to be ss attracted and os attacked. Can’t that be used as the proof that homosexuality is chosen, while heterosexuality is normal and anything else deviates from what’s normal?

“Maybe some people donâ€™t need to ‘decide’â€“maybe having had past relationships with both Erin and Aaron works fine for them. Like, whose life exactly are we making easier, here?”

Perhaps ours? If you spend years trying to discover who you are and finally see yourself as gay, to be confronted by someone who says they’re both gay and straight–as it were–can be perhaps not off putting, but confusing.

“The fence-sitterâ€™s, or the angry gay whoâ€™s afraid to get ditched for a member of the opposite sex?”

Quite possibly. I can compete with another man, but how can I compete with a woman?

“I understand the frustration of watching ‘hasbians’ and ‘yestergays'”

Yestergays! That’s pretty good 8^)

“take advantage of the legal system and marry a hetero partner when they could never have done that with a same-sex one (and, of course, itâ€™s usually a lot easier for them to reproduce too).”

Well, for me it’s like, why didn’t you settle down with a person of the same sex? It just seems, like Tom Robinson for example, a cop out. He had years to find a man to settle down with, yet marries a woman and fathers kids, yet insists he’s gay. It’s a feeling that their fear is more powerful than their love for that other person. They want the cache of being married and parents, but won’t give up the–hipness?–of being a part of the LGBTQ community. Like suddenly they’re not “just” a married couple with kids; they’re a married couple one of whom is bi, with kids. They want to assimilate within the straight world, yet won’t leave the queer world.

“But there it is againâ€“if Joe or Jane Queer settles down with an opposite-sex partner, theyâ€™re a sell-out, and if Joe or Jane settles down with a same-sex partner, everyoneâ€™s waiting for the other shoe to drop and Joe/Jane to trade them in for a different model.”

Well, I don’t think bi’s are slutty. I’m sure they’re no more, or no less slutty than anyone else. But then again, there’s the question. When the relationship ends, do they choose whom they will date now? Plus, where are the bi’s finding all these people to date? It seems greedy to some. Do they admit being bi, or do they hide it? So many bi questions.

“I donâ€™t know where all these bi-accepting queers are, but where I live theyâ€™re most certainly not the majority.”

Well, maybe bi’s should be more vocal. There is a bi news group, soc.bi and alt.motss.bisexua-l and the posters do complain a lot about the gays. So I guess it’s a two-way street.

“I guess Iâ€™m just tired of Ls and Gs comforting themselves by attempting to invalidate the existence of Bs, you know?”

I don’t know if we’re trying to invalidate them, so much as asking them to pick a camp and stick with it.

“Theyâ€™re not going to go away just because theyâ€™re not taken seriously. The rest of us sure havenâ€™t.”

@ Paul Raposo: First lemme start out saying that I’ve really enjoyed our little sparring match here. I grew up in a household of argumentation and even devil’s advocacy. However, you can’t just say lines like:

“Your identity does not correlate with your queernessâ€“in that youâ€™re not queer because of who you are and youâ€™re not who you are, because youâ€™re queer. What is does correlate with is a group identity. How you choose to identify within our group is your choice. But that you have a group you can identify with is the unifying factor.”

without expecting that my identification with my queerness [over which I have no control] can be extended to creating an identity based around my skin color, or eye color, or hair color. [These last two can be masked, much like sexuality, but not changed.] I just don’t buy into identity politics. Period. You’re not going to win me over with anything along those lines. I think identity politics while initially helpful to a community is like a baby bottle. You’ve got to remove that thing before too long or you’re going to end up with a mouthful of crooked, warped teeth. Teeth who think because they shine so brightly they’re not just the same cellular matter as every other part of the body.

You have a much better chance with:

“The only people Iâ€™ve seen make this argument are those who wish to cast the LGBTQ community in a negative light. You have separated your brain from your penis. Youâ€™ve made it clear that you are one person outside the bedroom and another inside. Youâ€™ve reduced yourself to glands, urges and orgasms.”

I mean, if it weren’t so _wrong_. The GBLT community _needs_ to be shown in a not always positive light. It’s called the light of truth. I’m gonna come out of the closet here and reveal what should be patently obvious: I _do_ consider myself part of a bigger community of queers. [I don’t say “gay” by preference because 1. I don’t fit the stereotype of Gay(tm) culture, and 2. “gay” doesn’t include other sexual minorities] Queer people != Gay(tm) culture. I suspect [a much better choice than presume or assume!] you mind understand that due to the fact that you’re reading Queerty instead of Towleroad. [Though one can read both.]

Still, I don’t see how disrespecting the Gay(tm) Machine [I trust you’re politicized enough to know the term, _X_ Machine] equals splitting my life into a dichotomy of sex and non-sex. Yes, we are the same person in the bedroom and the living room but we don’t _act_ the same in both rooms. Gay(tm) media often gets this wrong, sadly, with its own brand of minstrel show sure to pacify old queens with a Dorian Gray on-screen representation and cajole young queers into perpetuating the same stereotypes. And getting this wrong needs to be held up to accountability from within, just like we’re doing here. That doesn’t mean I hate queers [myself included] but that I don’t think we’re perfect.

Also, you’d probably do well to take sentences like “Iâ€™ve never met a bi person who was completely bi” out of your repetoire completely. They make you sound as bigoted as a young Christian suggesting they’ve never met anyone who wasn’t gay or God couldn’t heal. Not saying you _are_ that biased against bisexuality but sentences like that frame you that way. That being said, I think that “bi” can be a nice introduction to the “queer” pool. I considered myself bi when I first came out because I’d dated and had deep romantic relationships with girls until then. It was only after talking with a fellow newly “bisexual” friend that I realized that my feelings and desires were pretty much exclusively for men. [Call me, Maggie G, and we could give it a try though. And bring your brother in case it doesn’t work.] But I don’t want to get derailed by this new topic. I’ll let you [Paul] continue double tracking as you please. :)

Jun 12, 2007 at 10:26 am · @Reply ·

Paul Raposo

“without expecting that my identification with my queerness [over which I have no control] can be extended to creating an identity based around my skin color, or eye color, or hair color. [These last two can be masked, much like sexuality, but not changed.] I just donâ€™t buy into identity politics. Period.”

But it’s not identity politics. It’s about forming communal bonds with people who are similar in orientation. It doesn’t have to do with politics at all. Yes, coming out can be political for many. But most people don’t come out waving a, “We’re here…” placard. But they do come out looking for people who are similar to them, whether in sexuality, likes, ideas or even physically.

“Youâ€™re not going to win me over with anything along those lines.”

Who says I’m trying to win you over? I’m just spitballing here.

“I think identity politics while initially helpful to a community is like a baby bottle. Youâ€™ve got to remove that thing before too long or youâ€™re going to end up with a mouthful of crooked, warped teeth.”

There’s nothing wrong with weening off the bottle, but you continue to drink milk as you grow up. Deciding that you’re (and by “you’re” I mean LGBTQ’s in general, not YOU yourself,) beyond the “community” and then marching off in a huff helps no one but our opponents. Some people drink whole milk, other drink skim and still others drink chocolate milk. But they’re all milk drinkers. The LGBTQ community needs all sorts of cum guzzlers to make it interesting.

“Teeth who think because they shine so brightly theyâ€™re not just the same cellular matter as every other part of the body.”

It’s arguments like that that make be think this might be more than just collectivism, or identity politics. Let’s cut the bullshit; who hurt to make you upset with the community? Tell me your secret and I’ll tell you mine.

“The GBLT community _needs_ to be shown in a not always positive light.”

And who should do the showing? If you walk away from the message, you allow others to control that message. And those others mayn’t have our best interest at heart. Doesn’t it make sense that the bad news should come from people who know us and care about us, rather than people who want us legislated out of existence?

“Itâ€™s called the light of truth.”

Truth can be subjective, RSL. Who decides what the truth is, or how it shall be interpreted? Shouldn’t each person within a group decide for themselves what the truth is? Shouldn’t that person share their ideas of truth with people who share a common goal?

“Iâ€™m gonna come out of the closet here and reveal what should be patently obvious: I _do_ consider myself part of a bigger community of queers.”

Good for you, RSL.

“[I donâ€™t say ‘gay’ by preference because 1. I donâ€™t fit the stereotype of Gay(tm) culture,”

Such as? Have you been told you don’t fit, or do you THINK you don’t fit?

I appreciate where you’re going with this, but I don’t think the phobe who hurls insults like queer is a kind person who wants to include all sexual minorities within their slur.

“I suspect [a much better choice than presume or assume!]”

Well, a presumption is based on present facts and past experience. A suspicion is just that. No one likes to be presumptuous, but no one like to be suspect, either. Oh the English language!

“you mind understand that due to the fact that youâ€™re reading Queerty instead of Towleroad. [Though one can read both.]”

And form opinions in regards to both, without walking away from either. The *internets* is a wonderful parable for the queer world.

“Still, I donâ€™t see how disrespecting the Gay(tm) Machine [I trust youâ€™re politicized enough to know the term, _X_ Machine]”

Nope.

“equals splitting my life into a dichotomy of sex and non-sex.”

That was the impression I got from your writing. It seemed like you felt you are a practicing homosexual and a human being, as if the two are separate entities.

“Yes, we are the same person in the bedroom and the living room but we donâ€™t _act_ the same in both rooms.”

It depends. Obviously you’re not taking your pants down in the street. But if you’re queer in the street–by telling people you want to fuck Jake Whatshisface all night long–aren’t you also queer in bed–when you do fuck Jake Whatsit all night long.

“Gay(tm) media often gets this wrong, sadly, with its own brand of minstrel show sure to pacify old queens with a Dorian Gray on-screen representation and cajole young queers into perpetuating the same stereotypes.”

What I see is an expectation to physical and age conformity, but not, at least amongst ourselves, a personality conformity. The only people I see perpetuating the gay minstrel is straight people. Whether actors, producers, directors, or mag editors. I know very few gay people who liked “Will & Grace” and I know very few straight people who hated, “Will & Grace.”

“And getting this wrong needs to be held up to accountability from within, just like weâ€™re doing here. That doesnâ€™t mean I hate queers [myself included] but that I donâ€™t think weâ€™re perfect.”

Problem is, we’re doing it here. How does that help those who aren’t reading this?

Of course we’re not perfect, but shouting it from across the street doesn’t help the situation. Walking over and saying this blows opens up the discussion to different ideas.

“Also, youâ€™d probably do well to take sentences like ‘Iâ€™ve never met a bi person who was completely bi’ out of your repetoire completely.”

I thought we were all about truth? That is my own experience, RSL.

“They make you sound as bigoted as a young Christian suggesting theyâ€™ve never met anyone who wasnâ€™t gay or God couldnâ€™t heal.”

I didn’t say bi’s don’t exist, or should change. That is not an apt comparison, RSL.

“Not saying you _are_ that biased against bisexuality but sentences like that frame you that way.”

Well, now it seems that you are trying to dictate what the agenda should be. See how easy it is, RSL?

“That being said, I think that ‘bi’ can be a nice introduction to the ‘queer’ pool.”

Jesus CHRIST what a load of conservative bollocks, you sound like some grandparent complaining to a teenager, hey, we won the war for you! Whatever it has become now I thought Stonewall was initially promoting sexual liberation, not further ghetto-ising and labels (‘post-gay’ isn’t helpful either). Someone gets asked about their sexuality and answers it honestly and they get attacked for not picking a label or choosing a side when these are all basically fictituous. We shouldn’t be encouragine further divisions between people who are in some way queer, even if they don’t occupy an extreme. We should be promoting or working towards an environment where the labels are not the point, and we accept the diversity and complexity of human sexuality.

Oct 14, 2007 at 11:31 am · @Reply ·

Bwoof

The replies on here are not surprising.

A lot of them are written by biphobic homosexuals who are completely monosexual and do not even understand bisexuality like us bisexuals do.

I see biphobic gay men like the above posters as being hypocrites since they want sexual equality and rights and everything yet they deny the existence of bisexuality and this is EXACTLY what heteros did in the past to gay men and what the Born again and “Ex”-Gay people do to us GLBT People today!

I agree with Adam Whyte. Why does it matter if someone does not want to call themselves gay? Or if they don’t like how gay has become more white and middle class/upper middle class? I agree with him in that we shouldn’t be fighting with each other based on labels.

Oct 26, 2007 at 7:19 am · @Reply ·

Brandon85

Biphobia? Ha! Listen, we monosexual gay men want no parts of the other sex in a sexual way. Bisexual men (excluding those that may have enjoyed women, but can forgo them, particularly when in a ss relationship) by their very constitution, incorporate female sexuality into the relationship. When you’re joined with someone, everything about them comes along. Perhaps failure by certain bisexual men to grasp what being a gay man is about, is what leads to ignorance of this basic information.

Oct 26, 2007 at 8:54 am · @Reply ·

Mr. B

Wow, Brandon, that’s a little extreme, isn’t it? That line of thinking isn’t so far from lesbian separatism–“We want no part of a woman who is in collusion with the patriarchy by sleeping with the enemy!” I mean, if a guy digs you, he digs you. Whomever else he might have slept with before you generally doesn’t apply to your relationship (whether that extends to a quick roll on a bathhouse cot or wedding rings or something in between).

I tend to be more interested in where the men I date/sleep with are now (that is, with me) than what they’ve done in the past. And, really, if I have any concerns about the past, whether or not my partner has ever had enjoyable sex with women (he has, and has a daughter as a result) is the least of my concerns. I mean, hell, he’s also been with enough guys who were radically different from me that I could be busy all day if I wanted to compare myself to past partners. If anything, most comfortably bi guys (that is, not sexually confused, closeted, voracious for both sexes or any of the other stereotypes that generally make the rounds) I’ve encountered are more secure about their identities in general than a lot of guys who claim a Kinsey 6. Or, really, a Kinsey 0.

Oct 26, 2007 at 9:39 am · @Reply ·

Brandon85

I don’t think it’s extreme. I don’t think women are the “enemy” or think female sexuality is evil, but I’m not a fan of it. At best, I’m neutral about it, at worst, annoyed. And I don’t mind guys that have had enjoyable sexual/romantic interactions with women in the past. In fact, that’s the kind of bisexual men that I find tolerable – those that went from exclusive os relationships to exclusive ss relationships. The rest present an obstacle for the reason stated before – women (through him) are part of the relationship – something unwanted and something with which you can’t compete. True, there are difference among the same sex and similarities between the sexes that adds complexity. However, that tends to cover everything outside basic physiology – the predominant feature of sexual orientation and attraction. I don’t know about you, but I’d be highly irked if some guy I was dating was expressing his interest in women. (even if not with an actual woman)

Oct 26, 2007 at 5:38 pm · @Reply ·

Mr. B

Eh. I think it’s a pretty case-by-case thing. (I mean, how do you feel about some guy you’re dating watching gay porn?)

I’m comfortable enough about my current relationship that if he comments on the attractiveness of a guy OR girl, I’m not instantly jealous. That’s because I know him and I know our dynamic and I know that he’s satisfied by being with me (as I am with him) and that, by his very nature, if he wasn’t satisfied he’d say something to me rather than just taking off or cheating on me. But I don’t hold him to different standards than I would a gay partner. I’m more okay with him saying, “Portia de Rossi is gorgeous,” than I would be if he ever said, “God, I used to have the best sex with Joe. He [list a thousand reasons why Joe was more desirable than me].”

I would be willing to wager that the two big hangups gay men AND lesbians have about bisexuals is that 1) they feel they can’t compete with a different gender and 2) bisexuals have, at least presumably, the opportunity to just melt back into the normative world of approval about their relationships. It’s not necesarily fair–either way–but such is life. My guy doesn’t compare men to women (either individually or as a whole). But, you know, I used to be fairly uncomfortable with dating a bi person for both the reasons I mentioned above, and it’s taken a solid relationship with one for me to get over it. I know not every bisexual thinks like he does, but then, there are plenty of gay (and straight) folks who have grass-is-always-greener/wandering eye syndrome pretty badly themselves.

Oct 26, 2007 at 7:17 pm · @Reply ·

Brandon85

how do you feel about some guy youâ€™re dating watching gay porn?

I see where you’re going so to make this as brief as I can, I have to say that a although no guy is identical to another, the physiology is another matter. So even while I may feel jealousy toward another guy, at least there’s that representation that can give some kind of consolation. A female cannot completely represent me on a basic physiological level, the level that actually is predominately important in sexual orientation and attraction. Personality and other is a different story, of course.

To end, let me give an illustration. Question – if you as a gay man were left with only two other human beings in existence (a barney frank and halle berry type) and you started to feel the desire for sex with another body, who do you think (even though they not be your specific type) you will be drawn to on a sexual level?

Oct 26, 2007 at 9:55 pm · @Reply ·

Brandon85

BTW, in reference to these gender blind bisexuals, I have a difficult time believing that is real, which is the reason why it wouldn’t matter to me that the bisexual “doesn’t compare men and women”. To me, it’ll still feel like a comparison, especially since I am very aware of gender.

Oct 26, 2007 at 9:56 pm · @Reply ·

Mr. B

BTW, in reference to these gender blind bisexuals, I have a difficult time believing that is real, which is the reason why it wouldnâ€™t matter to me that the bisexual â€œdoesnâ€™t compare men and womenâ€. To me, itâ€™ll still feel like a comparison, especially since I am very aware of gender.

Fair enough. My only answer would be that everyone is different. I know that my fellow is rather unusual in a lot of ways, and even amongst all the gay men I’ve ever dated he’s the only partner I’ve ever had where I felt completely confident that he would never just fizzle out on me, attraction-wise, and not tell me. Maybe that says more about me than him, but oh well.

Anyway, yeah, even Kinsey said that even though plenty of people are somewhere between 0 and 6 on his scale, very few register 3 (right in the middle). I’d assume most bi-identified people were more like 2s or 4s (or some variation), or that some of them had relative numbers that changed throughout their lifetimes. (And yes, I understand that this change is something that makes a lot of gay–and straight–people uneasy.)

And I think that, overall, gender is a big deal in this world–especially in this society, no matter how much we want to say it’s not. I’m pretty comfortable with the binary system (although I definitely respect those who defy it!). And I’m pretty comfortable claiming gay–I definitely prefer men and am just more physically and emotionally interested in them. I’ve been with a few women before and didn’t vomit and die, and depending on who my choices of the last human beings were, I suppose there’s always a chance I could choose the woman. (Or, who knows, maybe I’d want them both.) Maybe to some, this means I have to turn in my fag card, but I don’t agree.

In conclusion, I’d say that people have different priorities when it comes to attraction. And I wouldn’t say “gender-blind” for some bi folk so much as just that gender isn’t the highest priority for their specific preferences. For some people it’s gender. For others, it’s genitalia. (Yes, sometimes the two don’t match up.) For others, it’s both and for others still, it’s something else entirely. But whatever way the coin falls (or, really, the ten-sided die), what I hope for in partners is that they are comfortable enough with what they want to pursue it, or at the very least to be open about it. I think–and I did say “think”–I’d rather be with a guy who had only ever been with women before but was comfortable with his attraction to me and sure that he wanted to be with me, than a guy who felt gay to the core and would become furious enough to be moved to violence if anything happened to make him question his sexuality. (Not saying that’s what you would do, Brandon–this is personal anecdote, an experience I’ve seen someone have.)

Oct 27, 2007 at 12:45 am · @Reply ·

Brandon85

Maybe to some, this means I have to turn in my fag card, but I donâ€™t agree.

I can’t see why. The words we use mean something. Granted, some gay men can have sex with a woman out of some kind of curiosity or just for the physical sensation, basically like masturbation, and still be called gay, but if he is experiencing a really core attraction to femaleness, then I think he may want to re-think his identification.

than a guy who felt gay to the core and would become furious enough to be moved to violence if anything happened to make him question his sexuality.

In ironic fashion, that would be kind of hot…if the guy is really gay, that is. It’d be the perfect antidote to my sickness with seeing straight guys behave like this all the time. lol

Ultimately, I realize bisexuality can manifest in varying ways, that only certain types make me uncomfortable. Sure, they can’t can’t control how they feel about the genders, but I can’t help how I feel about the situation. That too, is life. There’s a good chance that there’s many other people in the world you’re compatible with.

And on that note, you can have the last word.

Oct 27, 2007 at 8:18 am · @Reply ·

nycpapabear

I am a 55 year old “queer”. I marched, I protested, I paraded, I cruised but I never held a press conference to announce I’m gay. Why should I? Those who know me, know. Those who don’t know me, it is none of their business.